{"id":7037913,"date":"2026-08-11T12:04:03","date_gmt":"2026-08-11T12:04:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/peraltafinancing.com\/business\/marketing\/the-only-two-types-of-content-that-ai-can-never-make\/"},"modified":"2026-08-11T12:04:03","modified_gmt":"2026-08-11T12:04:03","slug":"the-only-two-types-of-content-that-ai-can-never-make","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=7037913","title":{"rendered":"The Only Two Types of Content that AI Can Never Make"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n \"\" <\/div>\n
By Andy Crestodina<\/a><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
\n
\n

There’s so much talk about what AI can do. But what can\u2019t it do?<\/em><\/p>\n

Years ago, my friend Steve Rayson published a report<\/a> that analyzed the performance of a million articles to see what gets links and shares. His conclusion changed my content strategy forever\u2026<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/td>\n\n
Steve Rayson, Founder of BuzzSumo<\/a><\/h6>\n

“If you want to create content that achieves a high level of both shares and links, then you should concentrate on opinion-forming, authoritative content on current topics or well-researched and evidenced content.”<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\n

He\u2019s telling us that two types of content consistently outperform: strong opinion<\/strong> and original research<\/strong>. This was seven years before the launch of ChatGPT, but it\u2019s more relevant today than ever.<\/p>\n

Why? Because AI can\u2019t make this kind of content. Only humans can.<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s explore these types of content and reconsider our own content strategies. Let\u2019s future-proof our content for the AI-writes-lots-of-everything era. And let\u2019s consider a few AI prompts to help us make these kinds of articles. Because it can.<\/p>\n

Why can\u2019t AI do this?<\/h2>\n

Everything AI does is based on what it has already read. It summarizes, restructures, rephrases, and averages. We sometimes joke that AI should stand for \u201cAverage Information.\u201d Yes, averaging the internet is genuinely useful. And yes, most content gets better when you use AI.<\/p>\n

But two kinds of input are not in the AI training data:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The thoughts in your head:<\/strong> your experience, your perspective and the opinions you’ve formed over years of doing the work<\/li>\n
  2. The data you create through research:<\/strong> Both new research and the data you may already have in your business, which are numbers only your company can see<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    These are the two categories of input that come from outside the machine, out of reach from AI and physically impossible for it to generate.<\/p>\n

    Let\u2019s look at each and (ironically?) look for ways to use AI to surface novel ideas for the content strategist.<\/p>\n

    Type 1: Your own opinions (thought leadership)<\/h2>\n

    We humans have experiences that shape our perspectives and opinions. But AI has no experiences, no perspective and no opinions. AI models are trained to find the middle, where people agree. AI never takes a stand.<\/p>\n

    Ask AI for a contrarian take and you\u2019ll get a confident sentence, but it\u2019s probably something that no one would disagree with. But remember, if you can\u2019t disagree with it, it isn\u2019t thought leadership.<\/strong> Most content marketing doesn\u2019t meet the definition of thought leadership<\/a>.<\/p>\n

    Here’s the test that separates a real position from a fake one: could a smart, informed person in your industry sincerely argue the opposite? This, from legit marketing thought leader Seth Godin:<\/p>\n

    \n\n\n\n
    \"A<\/td>\n\n
    Seth Godin, Marketing Legend<\/h6>\n

    “Thought leadership always creates tension. It\u2019s about making assertions. You have to be willing to be wrong. You can be certain that some people will disagree.”<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    \n

    But that doesn\u2019t mean you have to be controversial. No need to touch the third rail. There are many relatively mundane topics that still qualify as thought leadership. Here are a few thoughts in my head:<\/p>\n